I'm sure Howard Kurtz, WaPo's media referee, will clear this all up.

Why is it that the right wingers -- so opposed to affirmative action, think that such a program should exist, but based on ideology?

Not to mention that neither Newsweek nor Slate are particularly liberal to start with, unless you're looking at them from somewhere far to the right of mainstream public opinion in the US, even today. Pointing to an outfit that publishes William Saletan, Mickey Kaus and Christopher Hitchens as evidence of liberal bias is, at best, counterintuitive.

"Tossed quickly after lefty outrage?" That's pretty rich.

Ah, yes, the right-wing culture of victimization.

i'm sure there's an explanation in here somewhere about howcumzit that so many post op-ed writers are right-wingers....

Here's a list of Washington Post columnists:

Anne Applebaum
David S. Broder
Richard Cohen
Jackson Diehl
E.J. Dionne Jr.
Marc Fisher
Michael Gerson
Fred Hiatt
Jim Hoagland
David Ignatius
Robert Kagan
Al Kamen
Colbert I. King
Michael Kinsley
Charles Krauthammer
Sebastian Mallaby
Ruth Marcus
Harold Meyerson
Dana Milbank
Courtland Milloy
Robert D. Novak
Kathleen Parker
Steven Pearlstein
Eugene Robinson
Robert J. Samuelson
George F. Will
Fareed Zakaria

I would say it is slanted, but not to the left by any stretch of the imagination. I guess the folks at Red State just need something to whine about . If this is the worst thing they find, then I'm happy.

the Washington Post is connected to both Newsweek and Slate

That's a kind of odd way to say that all three are owned by the Washington Post Company. It's almost as if they hadn't really researched this very much.

Yikes! The Washington Post pals around with liberals (and Republicans, and independents . . .)

Call the ideology police! That would be the RNC, of course, the ones enjoying the "Barak the Magic Negro" CD right now.

RedState, the place where otherwise-unemployable home-schooled wingnuts go to demonstrate what a disaster right wing homeschooling is.

...think that such a program should exist, but based on ideology? -noogs

Oh, I suppose you think ideology is something people choose and are not born with!

in the wingnutosphere, otherwise known as the land of arrested mental and emotional development, declaring something liberal makes it so regardless of the nuisance thing called reality.
.

Dear Erick,
Instead of whining, why don't you try doing some research and then writing some factual, insightful pieces about the real world, instead of just making shit up like you are wont to do? Then maybe you, too, could get a job with the Washington Post Company. That would actually be much less work than continually moving goal posts, and easier on your back, too.

Steve Benen wrote: "RedState's Erick Erickson took the opportunity to complain, again, about media bias."

RedState's Erick Erickson is a deliberate liar. He lies cheerfully, knowing that he lies with impunity, because his audience consists of weak-minded, ignorant, Limbaugh-addled mental slaves who will unquestioningly believe whatever BS is spoon-fed to them by the right-wing extremist propaganda machine.

And of course right-wingers never miss an opportunity to WHINE about being the poor, pitiful victims of "powerful liberal elites".

The title of the post was "Washington Post hires left-wing blogger. I guarantee they wouldn’t hire someone from the right." Even if you accept that Domenech's fate was sealed once "the phones started wringing[sic]" to complain about the hiring itself rather than the plagiarism, that's pretty clearly not what he was arguing in his original post. He argued they would "not even consider" hiring a right wing blogger, which they indisputably did. Either he completely blocked the whole Domenech affair from his memory, or he really doesn't understand the distinction between not considering hiring someone and hiring someone and then firing him.

Anyway, didn't Domenech resign? Obviously he wouldn't have done so completely voluntarily, but it seems doubtful that he would have resigned just because left wing bloggers were protesting to the Post (even if you accept the laughable claim that the Post would have fired him a couple weeks after hiring him because it turned out left wing bloggers didn't like him). If there was no good reason to fire him and the Post was just getting rid of the conservative, why legitimize their claims by resigning rather than forcing them to make an unfounded termination? While one can imagine that Domenech would have been fired anyway, there is simply no factual basis for such a claim since the plagiarism allegations eclipsed the more mundane ideological controversy so swiftly.

I am so sick of this crap. I used to be a Republican. Back in the late 90s I used to listen to Rush talk about how the left always made people into victims. Homosexuals were victims and needed protection, and women were victims and needed protection.

I can't for the life of me figure out when the right bought into this victimization thing so hard, because now it's them who claim to be victims needing protection. The liberal MSM and their pet War on Christmas just being a couple of examples. They really have managed to create their own little world were everyone is against them and only they know the truth. It would be sad if it weren't so damned infuriating.

Will someone give the Right the memo:

Closed repeatably-patterned viewpoint = whining; among a host of other rather unflattering attributes aspiring intellectuals competing in the democratic sea of ideas will find detrimental to their pursuits of getting others to listen to them!

When the "right-o-center intelligentsia" offer Americans of all stripes - not just the South, and the financial CEO crowd - solutions to our collective economic, international, and energy challenges, we may begin to listen!

Yet, for the Republicans who haven't gotten the memo, it may be years too late!-Kevo

Ho-hum, "liberal MSM" complaints? Again? These people are really getting pathetic. Their ideological positions are refuted by recent economic history and the electorate and they still continue to recycle worn out phrases that have been around for decades. If they are going to engage other than a geriatric population they'd better come up with some new packaging---and some new complaints to whine about.

RedState's Erick Erickson wrote: "Of course the Washington Post is connected to both Newsweek and Slate, so its biases are pretty well established ..."

Commenter Byron noted: "That's a kind of odd way to say that all three are owned by the Washington Post Company. It's almost as if they hadn't really researched this very much."

Actually, it's almost as if acknowledging that virtually all of the so-called "mainstream" mass media is owned by a handful of giant corporations who use it to propagandize the American people in furtherance of their corporatist agenda makes the pretense that they have "liberal" biases blatantly and laughably and obviously absurd to even the most Limbaugh-addled dittohead.

Therefore, phonies like Erickson have to resort to such "oddly" evasive locutions in regurgitating the scripted talking point that the corporate-owned media is "liberal".

Having said that, I must also say that I have often observed "sensible liberal" bloggers like Greg Sargent and Steve Benen "oddly" avoiding the reality and implications of corporate control of the mass media in their own commentaries on media coverage.

Perhaps it is best not to openly call corporate media outlets like the Washington Post what they are -- propaganda instruments for America's Ultra-Rich Ruling Class, Inc. -- if one is an aspiring blogger who hopes to work for them some day.

I canceled my 20-year subscription to The Washington Post in July 2006 because it had become nothing but a right wing rag. Methinks he (Erik Erickson) doth protest too much.

best for bride is a bridal store for bridal designer wedding gowns in toronto ontario gta canada offers bridesmaids mothers of the bride prom accessories

financials religions conducting fraud emancipatory merit infectives dictate reviews parkway

Hi! syhZvUac